One more Islamic dictator bites the dust...so sad. Next...
Posted on 12/21/2001 5:36:33 AM PST by truthandlife
The war on Drugs is going the same way with local hard men throwing the term drug producer at each other o get Americans to aid them.
This war on Terrorism is going the same way.
Tony
Bullseye! Unfortunately there are many people (in my country at least) who hope for exactly that.
When the next attack hits London, we'll check back with you and see how you feel then.
Don’t try and come funny with me sinkspur.
I was fighting terrorists while you were probably still in high school, when I heard of the attack even though I am now married with a family I immediately re volunteered for duty.
What is the aim of this war to punish those who attacked America or to settle old scores.
When Saddam invades Iran he had the full backing of America, during the war he received plenty of western help to build up his military machine.
If Saddam had never invaded Kuwait what then, he would have had an even stronger army an more advanced Chemical weapons and delivery system, would he of still been considered a threat.
Just think about it just say what would you be thinking about Iraq today if we had never had the Gulf war, if Saddam had never picked up the wrong signals from America.
Tony
I guess I deserve it.
I propose a hypothetical to you, you propose a hypothetical to me.
The only difference is that terrorists could hit London; Saddam can't do a thing.
Let's get back to reality.
I agree London has been hit many times, we have had some major explosions and have suffered loss of life.
America was hit and of course America has the right to hit back, but Somalia, you have one war lord telling you that another war lord is a terrorist never mind the fact they are both rivals.
Suddenly all these anti Saddam Iraqi groups are telling you of Saddams links to terrorism.
You have to ask your self is America being used to fight other peoples battles for them.
Cheers Tony.
Cheers Tony
How about a clear cut objective? Wage a war against international terrorism. Revenge is not the issue. We are fed up with terrorists. If we let a terrorist live when we have a chance to kill him or at least cripple his capability, the blood is on your hands.
Why not kill two birds with one stone? Our troops are already out there. Saddam is a terrorist. And HE has an old score to settle with us. We could lick his boot from now til doomsday and he still might kick us in the head. If we do not take down the Bath party of Iraq, then we have blown a golden opportunity.
Of course they put the finger on each other. But the world knows what Saddam is, and it 'aint a shoeshine boy. Not yet, anyway.
There is no old score to settle with So-damned. We won the first match, 7 to 0. His unrelenting efforts to acquire WMD and the ability to project, will place another match on the schedule. No hypotheticals necessary, reality bites and we need to bite back, or more of our people will die.
Re: the warlords pointing fingers in Somalia, Sudan and elsewhere, trying to choose our targets for us...well, just remember, this ain't being done on xlinton's watch.
Your people didn't get killed, UN boy.
"Waging war on international terrorism" is not a clear-cut goal. It will have to be better defined than that. Unless you are suggesting that we send troops to the West Bank, Gaza, Lebanon, Ireland, much of Africa, oops ran out of troops.
It's only muddy if you want it to be muddy. The 'cream of the crop' is easy enough to see. One target at a time. As for when we call it quits, that should be kept confidential. Why give the terrorists any hope of it ending?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.